From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41743 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q7Ag1-0002hf-OA
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:08:30 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1Q7Ag0-0003nX-CF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:08:29 -0400
Received: from mail-vx0-f173.google.com ([209.85.220.173]:41053)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1Q7Ag0-0003nH-9r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 14:08:28 -0400
Received: by vxb41 with SMTP id 41so563041vxb.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 05 Apr 2011 11:08:27 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4D9B5A96.3010603@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 13:08:22 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: spice in kvm-autotest [was: Re: KVM call minutes
	for Apr 5]
References: <20110405150703.GQ22884@x200.localdomain>	<20110405160119.GF8723@playa.tlv.redhat.com>	<1302020868.2669.13.camel@freedom>
	<20110405170830.GG8723@playa.tlv.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110405170830.GG8723@playa.tlv.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues <lmr@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Swapna <skrishna@redhat.com>

On 04/05/2011 12:08 PM, Alon Levy wrote:
>
>> The thing about WHQL is that it has its own test suite coordination
>> program (DTM), that has to run on a separate machine/VM. So they have
>> all infrastructure in place there. If we need graphical clients being
>> started and controlled on a linux bare metal machine, I am afraid we'll
>> have to resort to those GUI test automation frameworks I mentioned. if
>> our test is geared more towards windows clients, then they won't be
>> needed, sure.
> oh, but the added requirement is just launching the client

It would be interesting to have autotest support getting screen grabs 
from a client vs. directly from qemu.

That would allow you to run the step files through the client.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori